THE WATSONS - AT THE ADC
What is it about unfinished works? They have an immense power to intrigue and fill our minds with ‘what if’ conundrums. How did Dickens intend to end Edwin Drood? What are we missing in Schubert’s Unfinished Symphony? What was Chaucer planning in his hilarious but savagely cut short ‘Cook’s Tale’? Such musings are the stuff of the creative writer or composer. I treasure a recording of Elgar’s Third assembled years after his death from fragments and magicked into a powerful symphony.
So, what did Jane Austen have in mind for the ‘The Watson’s’ – an unfinished (and how!) novel set aside just a few chapters in? This was the challenge set for herself by playwright Laura Wade. She gave us the brilliant ‘Home, I’m Darling’ a few years back. Wade takes us directly in Austen’s familiar world – Emma Watson, a feisty Regency gal but without means and a husband. Various suitors – stable but boring, or handsome but caddish – emerge, there are bitchy sisters and the lure of a rich, castle-dwelling aristocrat who seeks Emma’s hand in loveless marriage. At the point where Emma is proposed to by said lord of the manor, the story stops dead in its tracks. Austen wrote no more. At this point Wade takes up the considerable slack with an astonishing coup de theatre. It would be churlish of me to give away the jaw-dropping twist here but think Pirandello and you’ll get the idea. Also add a dash of ‘Travesties’ and a touch of Dr Who! The result is an astonishing piece of theatre that takes you in so many unexpected directions not least into philosophical debate. There are moments of high comedy, anarchic mayhem and but also deeply affecting soul searching. It is the classic roller-coaster of emotions.
So, how did the local AmDram company Bawds fare with this very challenging play requiring a large ensemble cast and two powerful leads? The answer is extremely well. The play looked rather wonderful with its huge ballroom drapes and accurately costumed cast. The performance area was left fairly empty except for wooden chairs and this gave the performers lots of room to create an ever-shifting collage of stage pictures. The play rarely lets you rest and there is a restless energy – sometimes unnerving – which was beautifully directed by Sean Baker .
Beth Honeyford gave a towering performance as the ever-conflicted Emma. She is on a pot-holed journey of self-discovery and proto-feminism. Demure and very Regency at first, Honeyford took us to an Emma that would certainly fit into the 21st century (slight spoiler here). She held the stage with power but also affecting vulnerability. Sharon Goldtzvik was very well cast as ‘Laura’ – (another spoiler alert) – a writer obsessed with Jane Austen. She too created a very powerful character – funny, sharp but ultimately torn apart by the vagaries of the creative muses.
The supporting cast was also first rate with not a weak link in sight. If I had to pick out anyone from the talented bunch it would be Charlie Blackmore as the impish young boy Charles and Ruth Long as the terrifyingly ascerbic married sister in search of a rich brother-in-law.
The play is an excellent choice for an amateur company – plenty of juicy parts – and BAWDS did it proud. It reminded me of the alchemy of unfinished works and their power to inspire. But also the potential for disaster. Is there such a thing as an unfinished review? Well I have an excellent example of one which you will never believe. Here it is.
.
PHOTO CREDIT: PAUL ASHLEY
